As autonomous systems rapidly become ubiquitous, there is a growing need for a legal and regulatory framework that addresses when and how such a system harms someone. There have been several attempts within the philosophy literature to define harm, but none of them has proven capable of dealing with the many examples that have been presented, leading some to suggest that the notion of harm should be abandoned and "replaced by more well-behaved notions". As harm is generally something that is caused, most of these definitions have involved causality at some level. Yet surprisingly, none of them makes use of causal models and the definitions of actual causality that they can express. In this paper we formally define a qualitative notion of harm that uses causal models and is based on a well-known definition of actual causality [13]. The key features of our definition are that it is based on contrastive causation and uses a default utility to which the utility of actual outcomes is compared. We show that our definition is able to handle the examples from the literature, and illustrate its importance for reasoning about situations involving autonomous systems.

While Reinforcement Learning (RL) aims to train an agent from a reward function in a given environment, Inverse Reinforcement Learning (IRL) seeks to recover the reward function from observing an expert's behavior. It is well known that, in general, various reward functions can lead to the same optimal policy, and hence, IRL is ill-defined. However, [1] showed that, if we observe two or more experts with different discount factors or acting in different environments, the reward function can under certain conditions be identified up to a constant. This work starts by showing an equivalent identifiability statement from multiple experts in tabular MDPs based on a rank condition, which is easily verifiable and is shown to be also necessary. We then extend our result to various different scenarios, i.e., we characterize reward identifiability in the case where the reward function can be represented as a linear combination of given features, making it more interpretable, or when we have access to approximate transition matrices. Even when the reward is not identifiable, we provide conditions characterizing when data on multiple experts in a given environment allows to generalize and train an optimal agent in a new environment. Our theoretical results on reward identifiability and generalizability are validated in various numerical experiments.

The proliferation of abundant electricity time series (ETS) data presents numerous opportunities for various applications within power systems, including demand-side management, grid stability, and consumer behavior analysis. Deep learning models have advanced ETS modeling by effectively capturing sequence dependence. However, learning a generic representation of ETS data for various applications is challenging due to the inherently complex hierarchical structure of ETS data. Moreover, ETS data exhibits intricate temporal dependencies and is susceptible to the influence of exogenous variables.

Causal models are crucial for understanding complex systems and identifying causal relationships among variables. Even though causal models are extremely popular, conditional probability calculation of formulas involving interventions pose significant challenges. In case of Causal Bayesian Networks (CBNs), Pearl assumes autonomy of mechanisms that determine interventions to calculate a range of probabilities. We show that by making simple yet often realistic independence assumptions, it is possible to uniquely estimate the probability of an interventional formula (including the well-studied notions of probability of sufficiency and necessity). We discuss when these assumptions are appropriate. Importantly, in many cases of interest, when the assumptions are appropriate, these probability estimates can be evaluated using observational data, which carries immense significance in scenarios where conducting experiments is impractical or unfeasible.

Our focus in this paper is to solve causal inference problems using only observational data and (potentially partial) knowledge on the causal graph of the underlying structural causal model (SCM).

In this section, we provide proof for the disentanglement identifiability of the inferred exogenous variable. Our proof consists of three main components. Then we have ( f, T, λ) ( f, T, λ) . The conditional V AE, in this case, inherits all the properties of maximum likelihood estimation. The following proof is based on the reduction to absurdity.

Often, however, the causal relationship may be entirely absent or account only for a part of the initially observed correlation.